Chemical Education and the
I
Expectations of Society In order to survive in the most elementary sense we all need food, water, and protection: protection from the natural environment, protection from the direct assault of other biological organisms, and protection from the perturbations in the environment caused by biological organisms. Science and technology can, have, are, and will continue to make substantial contributions to meeting these needs for food, water, and protection. Our unprecedented and still growing world population is evidence of the success of meeting these elementary needs, a t least a t the survival minimum. In societies where science and technology have contributed most the quality and availability of food and potable water tend to he relatively high the quality and availability of health care tend to he relatively high the quality and availability of sanitation facilities and services tend to he relatively high the quality and availability of both housing and clothing tend to he relativelv high the life expectancy tends t u be relatively long rho investment tn national security tends10 hr relatively h:gh As elementary survival needs are met, wishes become desires, desires become wants, and wants become expectations. These are the ever-expanding expectations of society. These expectations may take the form of goods and services hut fundamentally they have to do with the individual's preception of an ideal quality of life. The goods and services may be ends in themselves; the goods and services may provide the means to pursue other ends. Members of society have, do, and will undoubtedly continue to look to science and technology to fulfill their expectations or to provide the pathways to pursue their expectations. Society has set a value on the production of professional scientists. Being accorded this recognition has been gratifying to the egos of professional scientists, and the academic scientific community has been delighted to create in its own image. Our reward systems clearly encourage the production of professional scientists. Graduate school science faculties justify themselves in terms of their research publications and the accomplishments of their students: where their students have gone on to, what they have gone on t o do, what they have published, and what honors they have garnered. Undergraduate science faculties justify themselves in terms of their research publications and the scientific accomplishments of their students: to what graduate departments their students have been admitted, with whom they have worked, and the graduate degrees they have collected. Two-year college science faculties tend to justify themselves in terms of the number of their students that complete major science programs in four-year institutions. High school science faculties tend to justify themselves in terms of the accomplishments of their students: the colleges to which their students are admitted and the that major in science. I hope and trust that elementary and intermediPresented at the 75th Anniversay ti^^ of the N~~ Association of Chemistry Teachers at WellesleYcollege, welles. ley, Massachusetts,May 11, 1974.
provocative opinion ate school science teachers and their students are simply having fun discovering scientific phenomena and exploring concepts. There is, of course, much to be said for this concern for the continued development of scientists and for a reward system that encourages and recognizes scientific achievement. The bloodline must he zealously protected and developed. At the same time there is the danger that a preoccupation with the development of professional scientists may negate another expectation of society. That is the expectation that every individual has the opportunity to have a rewarding experience in the pursuit of knowledge and understanding of the physical and biological phenomena in which that individual lives and is indeed a part. If our preoccupation with professional science and scientists denies a vast segment of our society the opportunity to acquire the knowledge and the understanding to enjoy and intelligently participate in a democratic technological society, then we have diminished and to a degree destroyed those individuals that constitute that vast segment of society. What of other expectations of society? They are many and varied. Some cannot he achieved except at great cost. Some are mutually exclusive. Many are related to the consequences of past scientific and technological developments. Many are phrased in terms of problems of society to he solved. Many involve social, economic, and political change, as well as scientific and technological developments. It is difficult to appreciate to what degree many of the problems of society are related to very positive scientific and technological advances advances in medical services and public health that have increased the vitality and the lifetime of individuals advances in machinery that have reduced the work week and to alarge degree freed us from the necessity of manual labor advanees in pesticides that have eliminated some diseases and expanded food production advances in modes of transportation that have allowed us great freedom in where we live advances in modes of communication that allow us to watch events around the world advances in materials of unprecedented durability that last far beyond natural fibers advances in methods and technioues of monitorine " the environment that let us know what we are eatingand breathing advances in military capability that have protected us from invasion All of these are positive contributions but their impacts, particularly their impacts, have created or at least escalated other The increase in population, the movement from rural to communities, the spread to and the of local public transportation systems are all consequences of the increased life span, the increased productivity of farm the increased mobility of individuals, and the expansion of industrv, Some Droblems are a conseouence of the increased number of people; some are a consequence of the geographical concentration of the population. The capacity of the air, the rivers, and the land to accommodate the usual waste products has been exceeded, and an Volume 51, Number 9, September 1974
/
569
added burden of new types of waste products has been added. The nation has become accustomed to an unprecedented rate of consumption of natural resources t o supply the energy and the materials consumed in goods and services. In the case of fossil fuels the sun's energy stored in chemical structures has been dissipated and is to a large degree unrecoverable. The metals on the other hand have been more widely dispersed and are in principle a t least recoverable. In any case it is clear that we cannot long continue to live and consume in the manner to wbicb we have become accustomed. There are moments in which one might dream of going back to an earlier society. On reflection this is not really so attractive and besides it is not an option that is open to us. The increase in population has seen to that. The use of renewable sources of energy, the further increase in food production, the reprocessing of materials, the protection of the environment, and the development of substitute materials are all challenges that can only be met by more sophisticated and more carefullv controlled technolom. It is almost an article of faith with scientishs that if the fundamental research be done, there will be a smooth and rapid transition into technology and the expectations of society will be met. In fact the transition is seldom smooth or rapid. An unbelievable array of organizations intervene between the research scientist and the consumer. These include the legislative, executive, and judicial branches a€ federal, state, and local government with their full complements of departments, agencies, foundations,and institutes the entire industrial comolex the private foundations the conservation societies the outdoor sporting clubs the political organizations the professional societies the labor unions Some of these organizations are dedicated to modifying the manner in which society perceives the ideal quality of life and thereby modifyina the expectations of society. Manv of these organizations seek t o control or modify change by the manner in which funds are appropriated and distributed, by the use of tax structures, by the use of licensing practices, by quality control regulations, by building code regulations, by import duties, etc. It is my conviction that no one understands the manner in which these organizations interact with each other or the manner in which this complex array is evolving. This vast array is a natural consequence of the social, economic, and political nature of the problems of society. The actions taken by this array constitute the national policy towards science and technology. My concern lies not in the fact that so manv oreanizations have eotten into the act but in the backgr&& of the individuai$ that constitute these oreanizations. What are the limitations of their capacity to understand the capacity of science and technology to contribute to the solutions of the problems of society? This includes the ability to understand an assessment of that which a science cannot do as well as to understand what it might be expected to do. If the sciences have the capacity to contribute, what will it cost in terms of dollars, personnel, and time? What other impacts, or side effects, are probable: both the immediate i m ~ a c t and s long- range - impacts? Have the education programs that have been available in the last third of a century made it possible for the puhlic to be prepared to participate intelligently in these organizations? Have they in fact made it probable that professional scientists are both willing and prepared to participate intelligently in these organizations? Are our cur570
/
Journal of Chemical Education
rent education promams making it possible for the public to be better prepared for this ~ & e ? ~ f the o r scientistto be better prepared and more willing to serve? So far this discussion has been concerned with science and scientists. What about chemistry and chemists? Chemical change, or lack of change, is so much a part of everything with which we come in contact and everything that we do, it is in a very real sense the central science. Physics and mathematics provide the foundation upon which chemistry is built and the sciences such as biology, geology, and psychology have the fascination of dealing with relevant systems. It is, however, the chemical changes that make these systems dynamic and the state of our understanding of these systems is now reaching the stage that the general concept of chemical systems and chemical change is within the grasp of the public. Chemistry is the unifying science and it should be presented as a unifying science. Those of us who teach chemistry have the opportunity and also the responsibility to explore new approaches to chemical education to meet the needs of those great hordes of students who are not attracted to the sciences in the professional sense. At the same time we have the opportunity and the responsibility to explore with students who are on their wav to becoming urofessional chemists the relation of chemistry to the pr&lems of society. Both are extremely important. The education of professional chemists is already on a sound basis. All that is needed here is a somewhat different attitude of mind of those who come in contact with these students. True, changes in attitude do not come about quickly or easily and this is a problem that deserves attention. The education in chemistry for those who have no professional commitment to chemistry or a related science is another matter. There are undoubtedly a number of ways such education can be approached and I hope that we all have been, are, and will be going off on our own adventures in this realm. The goals are really quite different from those for the preprofessional. If we can escape from the constraints of what we think they must have "to po on," the tools they must learn to use, the techniques they must master, and the problems they must be able to solve in three minutes, then we may begin to discover what these students would like to know and begin to feel free to let them take the time to do some experimenting rather than rushing them through exercises. We will have reached the point where we can have fun and the students can have fun. There is no reason their chemistry courses should he any more difficult than a history course. There is no reason the grades should be any lower on the average than for any other course. There is no reason we should be more concerned about the virtues of discipline than any other teacher. The success of our adventure will be measured by the attitude of the individuals towards themselves. Have they grown in their confidence to extend their own knowledge at the level of the public media? Has the satisfaction they have experienced with learning carried them on to learn more? For many years I defended the concept that a good course in chemistry was a good course in chemistry regardless of the goals of the student. The election to study in chemistry a t both the secondary and the college level has clearly indicated that either students and their advisers have not shared this opinion or that there are essentially no good courses in chemistry. In spite of this, I still believe it might be true if we were not so obsessed with the efficient production of professional scientists. But that obsession is there and to break free from it seems to require us to work for a time at least with groups of students who have no professional commitment to the sciences while we seek that which is of value to them and develop courses that are uniquely suited to their needs. Many have worked in this direction and progress is being
made. I believe, however, that the real breakthroughs are still to come. We cannot possibly inject students with sufficient knowledge of chemistry to last for half a century. The understanding of chemical change is going to continue to grow and the only hope is for those who acquire the confidence and interest to grow with it. The public media has
made great advances in the presentation of scientific developments, and it will undoubtedly continue to do better if there is anyone there to look and listen.
Anna J. Harrison Mount Holyoke college South Hadley, Massachusetts 01075
Volume 51, Number 9. September 1974
/
571
